The standard maximum delay of 2.7 s is normally the longest one can have in a patch area. In another thread the subject of sacrificing bandwidth for delay time came up, and indeed it is possible to do so.

This patch works by using multiplexing. Multiplexing is a way to combine more than one signal on a single line. In this particular case time division multiplexing is used, in one time slot the single line transports a bit of one signal and in another time frame the line transports a bit for another signal.

The delay line is here made to be part of this single line, and one time slot carries an original signal while the other time slot carries the already delayed signal (again). The time slots are just one sample time long, so the odd samples carry one signal and the even samples carry another.

Look at sw 2, when its clock input is high it sends it input to the out module, when the clock is low it sends its input back to sw 1. At that time sw 1 will e in the right position to send that signal into the delay line. One sample time later both switches will flip again, so we hear output from sw 2 and sw one will send one sample of the oscillator into the delay line. So the delay line gets the odd samples from the oscillator and the even samples from it's own output.

Anyway, this way you can go to 4.4 seconds of delay in one patch area, but the sample rate has been reduced to 48 kHz.

Now for this to really work the delay line must always hold an even number of samples. For a single delay this will not be the case, it depends upon the delay time, and it can be odd. By using two delays with exactly the same settings it is certain that the number of samples in the delay will be even always, even when the single delay would hold an odd number of samples.

The blue modules make up the building block, the other modules illustrate the idea. It is possible to use variable delays, provided they are both controlled in exactly the same way.

Credits are due to Rob Hordijk who brought this subject up (not on this forum) originally. the idea to use two delays to make it work was mine.

Amazing. Trying to understand how it works makes my brain hurt. Enough to know it does I guess.
I noticed that you can use more pairs of delay modules and they don't all need to be the same length so adding six 100ms or one 500 + one 100ms gets more than 5 and a half seconds. I love long delays so I set up the same in the FX area, need to swap switch connections for some reason but gives >11 second delay in one slot

Am I right in thinking that on the long delay output, the actual output format is the 48kHz delayed signal, interleaved by zero's every other sample?

If so, wouldn't it be better to use some sample&hold strategy, especially when going for 24kHz delays?

Edit: this started me to wonder about how a signal with a lower sampling frequency can and should be represented in a higher sampling frequency. Is there a difference between inserting zero's in all the 'empty places' of the higher sampling frequency in stead of keeping the higher sampling frequency on a fixed level untill a new lower sampling frequency signal arrives (a la sample&hold)? Intuitively, I would opt for the second option, but is this right?

Am I right in thinking that on the long delay output, the actual output format is the 48kHz delayed signal, interleaved by zero's every other sample?

If this were the case, you'd get a hell of alot of noise in the output signal. Think about what the waveform would look like if there were 0's ever other sample: a series of 2 sample long square waves of different volumes. It seems the patch doesn't work this way - I had a look on the old oscilloscope just to be sure too...

I'm not sure why this works the way it does - it makes logical sense for the last switch's output to switch between 0 and the delay output. Maybe it has something to do with each switch being on alternate channels each clock tick. But then how does signal even get through?? Is it something to do with the feedback path? This patch makes my head hurt

I still don't understand how these valueswitches work (in what they pass through when there's no input switched through to the output), but this patch has 4x delayed delay signals

Based on the mux-technique by Selvmarcus, applied in the same way as Blue Hell's long delay. Enjoy (btw: I only checked this to work on the demo, but I can't think of a reason why it wouldn't work on the synth)!

Edit: uploaded the patch again, hope it can be downloaded now

LLLongDelay.pch2

Description:

Delay at 24kHz, 4x longer than at full range. Techniques combined from Blue Hell and Selvmarcus. Second upload session due to double posting error.

wow, take a look at these with a scope/spectrum analyzer. whatever's happening in these patches is causing enormous, 'louder-than-fundamental', spikes at 48 kHz and 24 kHz, respectively (jan's patch, and then fozzie's patch) if i could hear them (or my output transducers could reproduce them), it'd hurt, i think.Last edited by cebec on Mon Mar 13, 2006 1:46 pm; edited 1 time in total

I'm not sure I understand what you mean ... your conclusion that the signal must come out in pulses seems correct to me, but as it's an 48 kHz signal I'd expect the DA filtering to smooth it out. Apparently though, after reading cebec's post, that sems to be a mistake. Apart from that the 48 kHz signal could give aliasing problems in modules following the long delay.

I did tgry to use a S&H on the output but nothing did get through it, no matter if I clocked it in phase or in anti-phase, whicj makes me believe it does not run an the full audio rate ??

Of course you can always apply a low pass filter after the delay, whci probably can be as simple as a mixer with feedback to itself. I don't have a scope reasdy though to check things out.

Oh, and the patch loads ok now, but didn't check it out yet - listening to this strill :-)_________________Jan

I did tgry to use a S&H on the output but nothing did get through it, no matter if I clocked it in phase or in anti-phase, whicj makes me believe it does not run an the full audio rate ??

Please check the latest version, it has a sample & hold, gives back the same volume as the input, and hope it doesn't have spikes (but can't check). It appears there are some weird sample delays in those s/h modules. My solution is strictly trial & error. I had a hunch the timing signal for the s/h would be the issue of the silence, but do not have a complete theory on what happens.

edit in response to cebec: only tap3x is the s/h 'smoothed' output of course, but your observations are interesting (but not adding up in my brain to anything sensible )

Ok the 48 kHz signals are softer than the original, there is some logic in that as they have one sample of signal and then one sample of silence.

Ok and the irregualr delays are logic as well, the direct signal is not the firs step of course so the last signal must be the fourthy tap really. When I connect it a bit differently that is all solved._________________Jan

Sorry for posting so much in this thread. My naming of the outputs could have been better. The last output (most delayed) is actually 4x delayed, and named so in this last patch.

In my demo-experiments, it works correctly with beat-synced delays, but the time factor of delay multiplication is dependent on the masterclock. 93 and 95 bpm work, but 92 and 96 don't. All related to the delay length imho.

I'll delete the earlier version of the file, to not clutter up this topic too much..

LLLongDelaySH2.pch2

Description:

Sorta final bblock of the 4x elongated delay. Replaces my second try in this thread. For use in one's own patch, make sure the master clock is set to a tempo that works correctly (see rest of message). Delete test signal & clock & beat modules to

Sorry for posting so much in this thread. My naming of the outputs could have been better. The last output (most delayed) is actually 4x delayed, and named so in this last patch.

That's all clear now to me :-)

Quote:

In my demo-experiments, it works correctly with beat-synced delays, but the time factor of delay multiplication is dependent on the masterclock. 93 and 95 bpm work, but 92 and 96 don't. All related to the delay length imho.

That's why you need two identical delays in series, when using one sometimes the delay length will be an odd number off samples and sometimes it will be an even number. For odd lengths it won't work correctly. HAving two identicvally set delays in series assuers you'll always have an even number of samples.

Quote:

I'll delete the earlier version of the file, to not clutter up this topic too much..

Ah well it's an interesting thread I think, good to see the pitfalls and the confusion :-)_________________Jan

That's why you need two identical delays in series, when using one sometimes the delay length will be an odd number off samples and sometimes it will be an even number. For odd lengths it won't work correctly. HAving two identicvally set delays in series assuers you'll always have an even number of samples.
....
Ah well it's an interesting thread I think, good to see the pitfalls and the confusion

Good point on the identical delays. However, I'm interested in using in live-played 4 measure-long delays (beatsynced), therefore, the use of the 2.7 mode of the quad module is best suited for tempi between 93 and 120 bpm.

And I like the way you enjoy the pitfalls & confusion. Can be a good attitude in life I guess...

I guess you all figured out that in this method of muxing the audio through a delay there is a serious problem with changing the delay time. It is impossible to prevent a delayline to skip the samples that belong to the other channel while changing the delay time. This should actually be done in the DSP code that manipulates the read and write memory pointers. My solution is to use a constant and check if the value has settled after some time, after which a S&H passes a new delay time value. The delayed action is a severe disadvantage but still better as recording the terrible noise when changing the delay time.

Another issue is when wanting to mux a stereo or quadro signal through a delay line and capturing the samples at the end. For this I use a T&H instead of a S&H, which works like a charm. It is a bit obscure how to sequence four pulses in a 'walking ring' fashion at 96kHz to be able to pass a quadro signal, but in the accompanied patch you can see how I solved that. Still, when changing the delay modules with other types can swap or shift the outputs in an obscure way.

The delay line modules have been in the system unaltered since alpha release 0.01 or so, and there was a remark from Clavia in the past that once they start to work on the G2 again they will a.o. have a look at making longer delay lines at lower sample rates. But as promises is what the road to hell is paved with I have no clue about the value of such remarks.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum

Please support our site. If you click through and buy from our affiliate partners, we earn a small commission.